People v. De Stefano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. De Stefano

194 A.D.2d 736, 601 N.Y.S.2d 808, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6415

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 21, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 194 A.D.2d 736 (People v. De Stefano) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. De Stefano, 194 A.D.2d 736, 601 N.Y.S.2d 808, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6415 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Namm, J.), rendered May 11, 1992, convicting him of arson in the third degree and burglary in the third degree (two counts) under Indictment No. 797/91, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, and (2) a judgment of the same court, [737]*737also rendered May 11, 1992, convicting him of arson in the third degree and burglary in the third degree under Indictment No. 1500/91, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdicts of guilt were not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Miller, O’Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Namm, J.), rendered May 11, 1992, convicting him of arson in the third degree and burglary in the third degree (two counts) under Indictment No. 797/91, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, and (2) a judgment of the same court, [737]*737also rendered May 11, 1992, convicting him of arson in the third degree and burglary in the third degree under Indictment No. 1500/91, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdicts of guilt were not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Miller, O’Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 A.D.2d 736, 601 N.Y.S.2d 808, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6415, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-de-stefano-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack